Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

It seems... (armchair general mode=on) wasteful? For such a small incursion. Time and time again they catch the Russians on the wrong foot, but novel strategies only work twice at best before they adapt. They caught them completely off guard, but it's just for a bit of a feint?

They won't pull it off the same way again is what I'm saying, so I'd have thought something more useful would be good. I suppose they didn't know it would work so well, so I should just be happy for them.
 
I hope the Ukrainian intention is to make an advance, brass up some units/infrastructure, and then leg it home before the Russians can bring their main force to bear - with the objective being that Russia had to devote far more of its forces to a wall around Ukraine, rather than being able to concentrate on the specific fronts it wants to fight on.

It's pretty obvious that this stuff is causing the Kremlin internal political problems, and that if Ukraine is able to repeat this kind of raid at regular/irregular intervals it's going to cause political instability within the power structures in Russia - but if the Ukrainians either push it to far, or attempt to remain in place, they'll get destroyed - which firstly allows Russia to say 'we won', secondly makes the Ukrainians looks utterly stupid to their partners (and population), and thirdly it means that had been an effective force is wiped out, and can't be used again.

Hopefully they've learned the lesson of Bahkmut, which a refusal to withdraw from turned an operational (in the German doctrinal concept) victory into an operational, or even strategic, defeat.
 
Well yes they're going to need to rout before long and the further in they go the harder it will be...I've read it reported that because it was such a secret mission that not even the USA - sorry, Poland-led NATO - knew about it, there was such secrecy that the Ukrainian troops that were redeployed for this weren't told where and what they were going to be doing until they were doing it. Which cant have been fun....it sounds like a horrific suicide mission so fingers crossed for them they make it back (unless they're fascists in which case whatever).
 
Spymaster said:
Absolutely. They can't seriously be planning to hold it.

Cause a fucking headache, divert resources, piss-off the Russians, make Putin look a dick; then fuck-off home.

Jobs a goodun :thumbs:
Click to expand...

www.newsweek.com

Ukraine digs in across Kursk

Kyiv's forces have reportedly widened the operation in Russia's border region as speculation mounts over their next move.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com

Looks like they are digging in.

www.newsweek.com

Ukraine digs in across Kursk

Kyiv's forces have reportedly widened the operation in Russia's border region as speculation mounts over their next move.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com

If the aim is to divert Russian resources from the front line, it makes sense to dig in to force Russia to spread resources more thinly.
 
ska invita said:
It does also spread Ukrainian forces thinner, and Ukraine have more of a troop shortage than Russia
Click to expand...
Ukraine still has to have forces to defend the border near Kursk (around Sumy) so they aren't necessarily taking forces from the front line. Moving that defensive but mostly inactive line into Russia forces Russia to spread their attacks out. It's a risk but clearly calculated to cost Russia more.

There is a stalemate now because well dug in defensive positions are hard and costly to overcome, so neither side can advance. Forcing Russia to deal with more miles of well dug in defenses increases the cost of the war for Russia significantly. Taking Russian territory also provides a negotiating position and weakens Putin politically.
 
Last edited:
Rimbaud said:
Ukraine still has to have forces to defend the border near Kursk (around Sumy) so they aren't necessarily taking forces from the front line. Moving that defensive but mostly inactive line into Russia forces Russia to spread their attacks out. It's a risk but clearly calculated to cost Russia more.

There is a stalemate now because well dug in defensive positions are hard and costly to overcome, so neither side can advance. Forcing Russia to deal with more miles of well dug in defenses increases the cost of the war for Russia significantly. Taking Russian territory also provides a negotiating position and weakens Putin politically.
Click to expand...

This.

It's a moveable feast of delicate balancing act - the deeper they go, and the longer they stay, the more damage they do to to Putin, but the deeper they go, and the longer they stay, the more likely they'll be destroyed. That would give Russia a huge psychological/propaganda victory, it would have a huge negative effect on Ukrainian morale, and it would cause serious questions to be asked throughout NATO on the wisdom of supporting Ukraine if it's just going to throw away it's people, it's gear, and it's victories in ill-considered, overly ambitious/deranged operations.

The win however of diverting huge parts of the Ru force that's battering the fuck out of the Öst Front, and making Ru use half it's army chasing ghosts, is a win well worth playing for...

It's knowing when to quit, and what battles you win by running away from...
 
When the Ukrainians do pull back to the international border, they could leave rather a lot of land mines etc and demolished fortifications behind them.

(Whilst building better defences on home territory)
 
kebabking said:
This.

It's a moveable feast of delicate balancing act - the deeper they go, and the longer they stay, the more damage they do to to Putin, but the deeper they go, and the longer they stay, the more likely they'll be destroyed. That would give Russia a huge psychological/propaganda victory, it would have a huge negative effect on Ukrainian morale, and it would cause serious questions to be asked throughout NATO on the wisdom of supporting Ukraine if it's just going to throw away it's people, it's gear, and it's victories in ill-considered, overly ambitious/deranged operations.


It's knowing when to quit, and what battles you win by running away from...
Click to expand...

I must be reading things differently because I agree with almost everything you say in this post (more in a minute) but when I read Rimbaud's post I was thinking 'yeah, that's optimistic mate'.

Because...

It's a moveable feast of delicate balancing act - the deeper they go, and the longer they stay, the more damage they do to to Putin, but the deeper they go, and the longer they stay, the more likely they'll be destroyed. That would give Russia a huge psychological/propaganda victory, it would have a huge negative effect on Ukrainian morale, and it would cause serious questions to be asked throughout NATO on the wisdom of supporting Ukraine if it's just going to throw away it's people, it's gear, and it's victories in ill-considered, overly ambitious/deranged operations.


t's knowing when to quit, and what battles you win by running away from...
That bit is right, and the time to move out is now. Unless you want to give Russia that propaganda victory and serious questions asked in NATO.

But...

The win however of diverting huge parts of the Ru force that's battering the fuck out of the Öst Front, and making Ru use half it's army chasing ghosts, is a win well worth playing for...

Half their army? Really? It's half? You're the expert, genuine question.

And if it isn't (and I don't think it will be), then it's an inevitable 'win' for Russia.


 
planetgeli said:
I must be reading things differently because I agree with almost everything you say in this post (more in a minute) but when I read Rimbaud's post I was thinking 'yeah, that's optimistic mate'.

Because...

It's a moveable feast of delicate balancing act - the deeper they go, and the longer they stay, the more damage they do to to Putin, but the deeper they go, and the longer they stay, the more likely they'll be destroyed. That would give Russia a huge psychological/propaganda victory, it would have a huge negative effect on Ukrainian morale, and it would cause serious questions to be asked throughout NATO on the wisdom of supporting Ukraine if it's just going to throw away it's people, it's gear, and it's victories in ill-considered, overly ambitious/deranged operations.


t's knowing when to quit, and what battles you win by running away from...
That bit is right, and the time to move out is now. Unless you want to give Russia that propaganda victory and serious questions asked in NATO.

But...

The win however of diverting huge parts of the Ru force that's battering the fuck out of the Öst Front, and making Ru use half it's army chasing ghosts, is a win well worth playing for...

Half their army? Really? It's half? You're the expert, genuine question.

And if it isn't (and I don't think it will be), then it's an inevitable 'win' for Russia.
Click to expand...

It certainly looks like a very large proportion of the Ru forces in/around Ukraine that aren't in physical contact with the Ukrainians are being moved - and an important thing about that is that for the Russians, some of those units are the doctrinally important OMG's - the 'line' units are being used to keep the Ukrainians in place and under fire, and hopefully to cause them to give way, but the OMG's (operational manoeuvre group) are high end forces kept just back from the forward line whose job is to exploit any gap in the enemy lines and rush through, brassing up logistics and racing towards that sectors objectives.

So, you take away the OMG's, as well as reserves/rotation forces, and the line units are firstly less able to put serious pressure on the Ukrainian line, and secondly they start playing a bit more defensively because they've got less back up - they take less risks, they fire less ammunition so as to have a bigger reserve, which means the Ukrainian units facing them get a bit of a break.

Personally, yeah, I think it's time to bin it off. Better to learn lots, achieve 80%, and live to fight another day than to push too hard and lose everything. For me, the ghost of Bahkmut casts a long shadow.
 
Not entirely sure what the game is, but there have been some benefits to this attack:

1. They’ve taken more territory than Russia has so far this year, and seem to keep going. One factor is that they have already bypassed prepared defences, and now have small teams able to move around with little opposition and ambush Russian units when they appear. It’s different to the east front where both sides are smashing their heads against a brick wall, this is more fluid, causing more chaos.

2 They’ve captured hundreds of Russian troops, destroyed a lot of equipment and humiliated the Kremlin, that in itself has some value. Many of these troops likely thought they’d hit lucky getting deployed to sit on the border in a relatively inactive part of the front, in fact some likely bribed their way there, and seem less willing to fight.

3. Russia had never stopped shelling small towns near the border causing civilian deaths, every day a few shells or mortars land in some village or another. Ukraine can claim (and I think has claimed) that they’re creating what the Russians called a ‘sterile zone’ to push back artillery that has been hitting their land and demilitarise the border. The same claim was made with Russia’s incursion near Kharkiv earlier in the year, which itself was a successful effort to divert Ukrainian resources. Same game here really.

4. If Russia wants to hit back, they’re going to have to smash up their own country with glide bombs then clean it all up later, remove mines etc. Don’t know how happy they will be about this.

But yeah, fucked if I know what the long term plan is.
 
ska invita said:
BBC analysis: one of two things is happening, either they should go back to ukraine having proven their point, or they dig in and try to keep it for the sake of using as a bargaining chip it in a future peace negotiation Ukraine’s incursion – where does it go from here?
most signs right now show to them planning on trying to occupy....
Click to expand...
Are they establishing an administration to govern the land they've seized? Everything I've seen suggests they may hold for a time but it is anticipated the land will be relinquished
 
  • Like
Reactions: tim
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

platinumsage
Ukraine and the Russian invasion, Feb 2022 - tangentially related crap
28 29 30 31 32
Replies
955
Views
48K
Dogsauce
Dogsauce
tim
The 2023 Russian Coup.
51 52 53 54 55
Replies
2K
Views
64K
_Russ_
_Russ_
Dogsauce
The Russian defenestration thread
2
Replies
43
Views
4K
Dystopiary
Dystopiary
platinumsage
Ukraine invasion memes and viral content
70 71 72 73 74
Replies
2K
Views
118K
kebabking
kebabking
Pickman's model
Ukraine after the war
2 3
Replies
62
Views
6K
phildwyer
phildwyer
Back
Top Bottom